Carl Levin

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Would that be helpful if we could learn that to see how well prepared we are, if we could perhaps ask the CDC, for instance, to make some kind of spot check assessment as to what percentage of recommendations have been adopted?

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

His answer was, that is correct.

We cannot blur that responsibility. We have got to focus it so that we can hold folks accountable if there are failures.

My major concern has been and continues to be, where will the principal responsibility for analyzing foreign intelligence rest?

I am not satisfied with what I understand the answers were.

I want to concur in what he said about our borders.

The Defense Department, as I indicated, sought the repeal of the 1993 prohibition on that research and development effort that could lead to the production of a low-yield nuclear weapon.

The number one threat that we all face is the proliferation of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction.

Would you take a look at the Senate bill 6, which was introduced by Senator Daschle and others at the beginning of Congress?

General Kadish, the 2004 national missile defense system to be deployed in 2004 relies on Aegis ships off the coast of North Korea to protect Hawaii from missile attack.

General Kadish, do the Aegis ships to be deployed off the coast of North Korea as part of the Block 2004 system have the demonstrated capability to track an ICBM targeting Hawaii from North Korea with enough accuracy to prosecute an…

That is troubling to many of us.

I think some others who have expressed themselves on this are troubled by the exaggerated description.

The administration is trying to put a label of a deployed national missile defense system on what is really a test bed.

These types of clauses, as far as we know, have never been used for any fielded system in history.

I know the classified number. I will leave it at that.

I am surprised that you even answered this in an unclassified setting.

But you did not have an intent. As I understand.

That is the intent of this language?

So that it is not limited to development testing, so that operational testing will take place on this 2004 system?

Do you know what its intent is? Have you asked the people who put the language in here what its intent is?

We are not going to be able to test the 2004 system that is being fielded as a complete system with a realistic, actual long-range target.

It will take place and should take place.